Programming Forums > Application Development > C++

grumpy · Apr 16th, 2006, 8:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rup

Because in C++ a cast is applied this way : void(variable) I had left it that way.

Rubbish. A cast is not applied "this way" in C nor in C++.

nnxion · Apr 16th, 2006, 6:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rup

Because in C++ a cast is applied this way : void(variable) I had left it that way.

When I get around to designing my own programming language, I'll be sure to add the 'feature'.

grumpy · Apr 16th, 2006, 9:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nnxion

When I get around to designing my own programming language, I'll be sure to add the 'feature'.

Oh? And what will this 'feature' do???

nnxion · Apr 17th, 2006, 5:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grumpy

Oh? And what will this 'feature' do???

The same as (void)(variable).

Jason Isom · Apr 17th, 2006, 6:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grumpy

Rubbish. A cast is not applied "this way" in C nor in C++.

http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infoce...ef/cplr188.htm

Quote:

Originally Posted by IBM

In C++ you can also use the following in cast expressions:

* Function-style casts
* C++ conversion operators, such as static_cast.

Are you implying that IBM is wrong?

DaWei · Apr 17th, 2006, 7:04 AM

Despite the fact that your reference link redirects so many time it gave me an epileptic seizure, I didn't see anything (in the 1.5 seconds I had to look) that contradicts what has been said here. As to your ultimate question, I would be happy to imply that IBM is often wrong. They chose Intel and Microsoft as the foundation of their PC, didn't they?

grumpy · Apr 17th, 2006, 7:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Isom

Are you implying that IBM is wrong?

No, I am not. The example used by rup is invalid: "void(variable)" represents a conversion to void which is not possible as it is not possible to have a variable of type void. int(variable) is used to convert variable to int, and is sometimes described as a "function style cast" to int.

rup · Apr 17th, 2006, 1:17 PM

Me no guru programmer. I accept that lack of accuracy is not called for. Thanks Grumpy for the tip. Had your post come a bit earlier I wouldn't have got so scared :-) And I don't think I was wrong about the C++ cast style.

DaWei · Apr 17th, 2006, 2:24 PM

Buy some gloves. Shovel handles are harder on the fingers than keyboards.

Apr 17th, 2006, 7:04 AM	#16
DaWei Resident Grouch Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 6,453 Rep Power: 10	Despite the fact that your reference link redirects so many time it gave me an epileptic seizure, I didn't see anything (in the 1.5 seconds I had to look) that contradicts what has been said here. As to your ultimate question, I would be happy to imply that IBM is often wrong. They chose Intel and Microsoft as the foundation of their PC, didn't they? __________________ Abstraction doesn't make it impossible to write bad code; it makes it possible to write superior code. Contributor's Corner: Grumpy on C++ Exceptions DaWei on Pointers

Apr 17th, 2006, 2:24 PM	#19
DaWei Resident Grouch Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 6,453 Rep Power: 10	Buy some gloves. Shovel handles are harder on the fingers than keyboards. __________________ Abstraction doesn't make it impossible to write bad code; it makes it possible to write superior code. Contributor's Corner: Grumpy on C++ Exceptions DaWei on Pointers

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Apr 17th, 2006, 1:17 PM	#18
rup Newbie Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: India Posts: 14 Rep Power: 0	Me no guru programmer. I accept that lack of accuracy is not called for. Thanks Grumpy for the tip. Had your post come a bit earlier I wouldn't have got so scared :-) And I don't think I was wrong about the C++ cast style.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Programming Forums > Application Development > C++

error: expected primary-expression...